posted at 12:01 pm on May 2, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) says he shares colleagues’ concerns that the Affordable Care Act could become a “train wreck” if it’s not implemented properly.

Reid warned that people will not be able to choose health insurance plans on government health exchanges if federal authorities lack the resources to set them up and educate the public.

“Max said unless we implement this properly it’s going to be a train wreck and I agree with him,” Reid said, echoing a warning delivered last month by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.).

Reid warned the federal government is not spending enough money to implement the law because of Republican opposition to ObamaCare. “Here’s what we have now, we have the menu but we don’t have any way to get to the menu,” Reid said.

Well, the Senate has had three years to properly budget for the ObamaCare implementation. Did Reid and his Senate Budget Committee majority build enough spending into the last three budgets to cover that? Oh, wait — Reid and his Senate majority never bothered to produce a budget at all! So whose fault is it that Reid doesn’t have the cash now?

And also, didn’t ObamaCare have a whole trainload of taxes included in the bill? Remember, Democrats insisted that it would not create any deficit spending in the first decade, and that front-loading the taxes would provide the necessary lift for proper implementation. Now they’re claiming poverty as a reason the ACA is running off the rails.

By the way, Reid’s admission reveals that Barack Obama’s answer yesterday at the press conference on ObamaCare was entirely misinformed, no? That’s certainly my conclusion in my column for The Fiscal Times:

“For the 85 to 90 percent of Americans who already have health insurance,” Obama helpfully informed his audience, “they’re already experiencing most of the benefits of the Affordable Care Act — even if they don’t know it.” Insisting that the implementation has already been accomplished for the already-insured, Obama claimed, “Now they don’t have to worry about anything else.”

Nonsense, scoffed Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler. “There are a variety of studies and reports that suggest that, beyond those groups, some 10 million people face the prospect of losing their current health care,” Kessler said in rebuttal to the President’s remarks.

A University of Chicago study shows that nearly half of existing individual plans (as opposed to employer-provided group plans) will not qualify under Obamacare mandates for coverage. This means that these already-insured Americans will have to start shopping around again and spend more–25 percent more or even worse. In Oregon, one insurer is applying for a 53 percent increase in individual-plan premiums in order to bring their insurance into compliance with the ACA, including the pre-existing condition mandate. …

Besides, the people who really need to worry are those about to be thrown onto the individual market. Employers are looking for ways to reduce existing employees to part-time status in order to duck the mandate to provide subsidized group insurance. NPR reported this week on the business trend, which would save costs to the company but massively increase costs for Obamacare thanks to its system of subsidizing individual plan purchases through the ACA exchanges.

At his press conference this week, President Obama tried to reassure Americans about ObamaCare. Instead, he displayed either an incredible lack of understanding about his own law, or something far worse. …

But almost nothing he said in defense of ObamaCare was accurate. Among his statements:

“A huge chunk of it’s already been implemented.”

In fact, all that’s been implemented so far are a few PR-friendly changes like a mandate to cover children up to age 26 and a more generous Medicare drug benefit.

Democrats put off the bulk of the law — the massive market regulations, the government-run exchanges, mandates to buy coverage, and various taxes and fees—until 2014, both to hide its true costs and to avoid any unpleasantness before the 2012 elections.

If you want to see where the train wreck will take place, read Josh Kraushaar’s piece on how ObamaCare will likely become the Democratic Party’s Iraq War:

Support for the war dropped as officials struggled to implement nation-building after the fall of Saddam Hussein. As casualties piled up and the violence worsened, the fringe position of the liberal base gradually became more palatable. No longer were war-critiquing Democrats seen as soft on national security. In the 2006 midterms, Democrats effectively campaigned on an anti-war message to take back the majority in the House and Senate for the first time in 12 years, capitalizing on war weariness. Eventually a number of Republicans split from the party to save their political hide.

While the debate over Obama’s health care law isn’t a life-or-death battle, health care affects voter livelihood (and their voting decisions) like few other issues do. And there are clear signs that if premiums go up, businesses are forced to change how they insure their employees, and implementation of the law is uneven, the potential for political consequences are significant. In the 2010 midterms, Democrats suffered a historic landslide when the debate over health care was abstract. The stakes could be even higher when voters have first-hand experience with its effects. (Just look at the fevered reaction from Hill staffers affected by the law for a sampling of how intense voter anger could become.)

In both examples, the presidential sales pitch ended up being overhyped, with promises made that couldn’t realistically be achieved. At its heart, the mission to oust Saddam Hussein was about preventing a dangerous tyrant from using weapons of mass destruction – but administration officials advocated everything from democracy promotion to preventing an alliance between Iraq and al-Qaida as part of its overall argument. When events turned south, failure to achieve many of the items on the checklist proved politically embarrassing.

Obama’s health care law was designed to expand access to the uninsured. It’s a noble goal, if not necessarily a smart political priority. (It’s more popular to advocate for improved health care, not expanded access.) But to win support for the law, Obama claimed it would lower costs, improve the quality of care and not force anyone off their current health care plan. That’s not shaping up to be the case. Premiums are rising, employer uncertainty is growing and voters aren’t viewing the law favorably – with many not even aware of the frontloaded benefits already in place. And even on the access side, the law of unintended consequences is kicking in: Some large retail companies are cutting back employee hours so they won’t have to offer health insurance. That’s not good for the economy or health care access.

Democrats own this train wreck entirely — even if the top Democrat insists that the train is chugging along and all the passengers are happy travelers.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

“For the 85 to 90 percent of Americans who already have health insurance,” Obama helpfully informed his audience, “they’re already experiencing most of the benefits of the Affordable Care Act — even if they don’t know it.”

Democrats own this train wreck entirely — even if the top Democrat insists that the train is chugging along and all the passengers are happy travelers.

The ultimate flaw in Obamacare, really.

When Social Security and Medicare were passed, they were passed along bipartisan lines, with huge majorities. That way, everyone involved had a stake in making sure that follow-up legislation and the inevitably necessary fixes, would happen.

The GOP can wash its hands of this turd sandwich, and laugh while doing so…

I realized how they are going to play this. Obamacare will still be revenue neutral, the new bills that fund it will be viewed as separate spending entities. Thus what was passed in Obamacare will still be “revenue neutral” just the new spending bills, wont’ be.

Trust me, you’re going to have to buy into this line in a couple of years or be a “unhinged wingnut” who can’t see what everybody else sees: the clothes of the Emperor.

Let Obama and Democrats own this, let them suffer, and most important of all GOP don’t give them more money. Heck maybe Roberts did us all a favor after all, I understand a costly one, but the people of this nation have to learn that progressive ideas are stupid. It is better they learn now than wait 10 to 20 years down the road when everything goes bust.

Short term pain for long term gain….

Plus it will be hard for Obama and the Dems to place on the GOP…It is named ObamaCare!

For the 85 to 90 percent of Americans who already have health insurance,” Obama helpfully informed his audience, “they’re already experiencing most of the benefits of the Affordable Care Act — even if they don’t know it.”

Static Analysis: it never fails the Democrats.

As if the set of “people getting health insurance through their employer” cannot change with the conditions.

Does he mean like I really have $1 million in my bank account even if I don’t know it?

If you only have $1…..that’s more than you need. You need no individual and private savings accounts, you need no personally managed retirement accounts, in fact, you even need not manage your income. Your benevolent government will be glad to relieve you of those burdens, manage your finances for you and take care of all your needs as it sees fit.

Reid warned that people will not be able to choose health insurance plans on government health exchanges if federal authorities lack the resources…

Like candidate John Kerry: I have a secret plan. Close the White House to school children tours, calulated out to say a millenium or two and assuming a modest inflation rate, and starting as does congress with a pre-boosted baseline…

While the debate over Obama’s health care law isn’t a life-or-death battle…

Au contraire! It is a FAR bigger life-or-death battle than Iraq ever was…and, if you don’t believe me, then talk to the families of people like Rudi Hargreaves. Then, you’ll get an idea of where this is heading.

Old and busted – America shouldn’t be building Nations abroad, we suck at it.

New hotness – We should be doing Nation building at home because we are great at it.

You gots your choices, Lefties: if America sucks at Nation building, that is generic and means the government shouldn’t do it abroad or at home. You can have it one way, or the other, but not both in succession.

And since the Left and D’s were WARNED about Obamacare being a trainwreck as it was BEING MADE, they cannot point the fingers for its failure at anyone else and it is up to the rest of us to make sure that this disaster has a thousand fathers through constant reminders. You on the LEFT wanted to do Nation building at home and the US government sucks at it and for D’s it must be pointed out that it doesn’t matter which party is in power. Both D’s and R’s suck at ‘Nation building’ and should swear off that drug of power and corruption. No good will ever come from it and rivers of blood are always in the final phase… keeping your liberty and life is in the balance.

At the time of the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan I called for a bit of fixing up of each place, but not ‘Nation building’ as we suck at it. Physical infrastructure is one thing, societies another and the two are not to be confused abroad or at home. That is the lesson to be learned for those on the Left: power does not bestow competence and governments are the last refuge of the incompetent. Look at the US federal government and point out the vast swaths of competence… because, quite frankly, I can’t see it anywhere. And that amount of power over society in the hands of the power hungry incompetent is a scary thing, indeed.

Obamacare was designed to fail and force single-payer upon us. Get with the program.

goflyers on May 2, 2013 at 12:26 PM

Of course it was, but failure is a tricky thing and a two edge sword. They wanted it to fail in a slow way, like Social Security has done, so the population would not notice. Not in a spectacular, “we can’t even set up” kind of way. It just screams that progressives and Obama are inept. They promise lots of goodies but they don’t deliver the goodies. It is like promising a drunken mob free beer and then tell them after they followed you all around town….there is no free beer….not good….this is going to turn ugly for them.

Heck maybe Roberts did us all a favor after all, I understand a costly one

William Eaton on May 2, 2013 at 12:23 PM

That’s always been my theory. After all, the 4 libs just wanted him to say that Congress can mandate commerce so it can regulate it. The limit on Congress stands as an equal ruling to the case that the mandate is a tax for an arbitrary classification.

Reid warned the federal government is not spending enough money to implement the law because of Republican opposition to ObamaCare. “Here’s what we have now, we have the menu but we don’t have any way to get to the menu,” Reid said.

I wish I could believe that the American people would see through this very transparent blame game going on. The blame the Republicans game that is. I have little faith that the majority of the American citizenry is paying attention and when they do all they hear is “it’s those darned Republicans fault!” Since the Republicans never seem to fight back this always sticks.

Perhaps, just perhaps this time these lowinfovos won’t buy it. After all not one R voted for this turkey. It was shoved down our throats by the Dems using a parliamentary sneak attack and these Dems wholly own this mess!

These days I just think that most are too ignorant or biased to see the truth….till it hits them next year anyway.

I say let ObamaDEMcare die a quick death from fiscal starvation. What nerve to ask taxpayers to flush good money after bad down the toilet as if the public was ever in favor of this legislative abomination.

I still see a silver lining in the growth of individual plans. Breaking the work-insurance bond is a good thing. Having your health insurance tied to your job has lots of labor-market-distorting side effects. It also distorts the health insurance and provider markets by making it appear free to the consumer.

Having more people on individual plans is the direction we should want things to move. I’d love to see everyone buying individual insurance (with support for low-income.) We could then open that market back up to catastrophic (aka real insurance) plans, and end the idea of first-dollar coverage for routine medical expenses.

Don’t worry. McCain, Graham, Peter King, and the rest of The Stupid Party will bail Reid and Obama out on this.

“Oh, I’m scared. I’m going to be called a meany. I have to help the Democrats. Then the Washington Post and MSNBC will like me.”

Battered Republican Syndrome.

The country will start to turn around when someone — from whatever party — gets elected who will understand that because they believe in limited government, the Press and “Opinion Leaders” will never love them — AND WON’T CARE!

eid warned the federal government is not spending enough money to implement the law because of Republican opposition to ObamaCare. “Here’s what we have now, we have the menu but we don’t have any way to get to the menu,” Reid said.

What did you do with that 800 billion per year rolled into the baseline budget after the 2009 stimulus. That’s right you squandered it on green energy projects that didn’t have a snowball’s chance in h*ll of surviving. Now you want us to pony up some more money. Call it what it is generational theft.

Wasn’t it “30 million” back when they were foisting this debacle off on us? Now, it’s double? And we’re not supposed to notice that people who HAD insurance have lost it?

Murf76 on May 2, 2013 at 12:38 PM

Well, at the time that “30 million” probably didn’t include the millions of newly minted citizens we’ll be getting with immigration “reform”, which are now being counted as part of that 50-60 million……and growing.

They wanted it to fail in a slow way, like Social Security has done, so the population would not notice. Not in a spectacular, “we can’t even set up” kind of way.

William Eaton on May 2, 2013 at 12:39 PM

Isn’t it kind of funny that APPAC(t)A has all these projected models of efficiency and spending limits in them that they demand insurers and providers meet–and they can’t even set. it. up. without running out of funds or inviting the image of a “train wreck”.

WOW. Hadn’t heard that story. I have some friends in Wales who were able to get reproductive benefits bcs of where they lived, & some other friends in England could not. All based on their zip code.
I wonder if that situation is comparable.
Whatever the case, the studies already done on the UK & Canada’s systems show the horrid consequences of nationalizing healthcare.
And yet only the spurious stories & outright lies regarding national healthcare get trumpeted by these communists.
The nasty more common stories need to be heard more often.

EXACTLY.
Just like a petulant teenager who blames their parents for any mess they get in.

Badger40 on May 2, 2013 at 1:01 PM

heh, you must know my 16 year old teenage son!!!!
I had to get him out of juvie hall again – this time for fighting at school….
Just one week after he got a ticket for pot possession…
it’s all my fault….

That’s just it – the progressives will never have enough!!!
Even after they have taken all of yours and then some!!!

As we’ve seen with the likes of Reid, Bloomberg, et al, they want to completely micromanage and dictate our lives. We mere mortals are not capable enough to do for ourselves what they insist on doing to us.

WOW. Hadn’t heard that story. I have some friends in Wales who were able to get reproductive benefits bcs of where they lived, & some other friends in England could not. All based on their zip code.
I wonder if that situation is comparable.

Badger40 on May 2, 2013 at 12:56 PM

The NHS claimed it was ‘experimental surgery’ and there was ‘insufficient supporting information’ that the surgery would work; yet, in 2006, Carol Davis, a diabetic, was the first person to have a gastric pacemaker fitted and another diabetic, Margaret Burns, from Liverpool, received her gastric pacemaker less than 2 years later. So, it wasn’t exactly “experimental” and, at least, 50 gastric pacemakers had been implanted – even for gastroparesis – BEFORE Rudi Hargreaves, a 22 year-old healthy, productive, young woman was stricken with the condition.

With them serenity is only possible with full assimilation and submission. And not guaranteed, even then.

Sometimes, I think they fully intend to push the limits to see how far they can go till open rebellion is sparked and they probably wouldn’t mind. That would just be a fine justification for implementing nationwide martial law, seizure of private firearms, arresting “enemies of the state” and indefinite suspensions of our rights.

One reason Reid and the Feds lack the money to implement the state exchanges mandated by Obamacare (those not set up by the states themselves) is because they also lack the authority. Somebody forgot to stick that in the bill.

Don’t worry. McCain, Graham, Peter King, and the rest of The Stupid Party will bail Reid and Obama out on this.

“Oh, I’m scared. I’m going to be called a meany. I have to help the Democrats. Then the Washington Post and MSNBC will like me.”

Battered Republican Syndrome.

The country will start to turn around when someone — from whatever party — gets elected who will understand that because they believe in limited government, the Press and “Opinion Leaders” will never love them — AND WON’T CARE!

FiveG on May 2, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Not on this issue, which is what gave them the House in the 2010 elections. Republicans can tell voters “We told you ObamaCare would increase your taxes and health care costs, and we tried to repeal it, now give us a Senate majority and we will repeal it!”

Republicans just need to tell voters that Obama sold them a false promise that he didn’t have the money to pay for, and that he’s robbing Medicare to pay for it.

Ed–you need to change the photo for the “train wreck”. The CSX rail company is not to blame for ObamaCare, and might not appreciate the adverse publicity. Or maybe you can photoshop the name out of the phot.